So it should be all the more easier for you to respond.
I have never discussed these issues on any forum, it's all hard time-consuming work for me.
I am not ignorant of the issues though.

They would keep me busy for a month!
But I will read as selection when I have time.

Yes, I have read extensively on vaccines.
The evidence, as I say, is incontrovertible.
I am trying to discus some of this evidence with you.

In fact I have.

Quote:

In 22 min you could not of read all of the links and articles

No, I certainly could not.
I am not ignorant on the issue though.

But that is what I want to discus with you.
Is what you link to just propaganda?
Is what I link to just propanganda?
Let's look more closely at one of the links and explore the issues.
I have made two attempts so far with thiomersol and HIB vaccine.

Quote:

You have not answered my questions

Which questions?
I can find only links.
If you start with one specific question I will atempt to answer it

For example, I have read this link:

Government studies (MMR & mercury vaccines)

That's about all it says!
Then just a whole lot of links - just like your posts!
No summaries, no quotes, no discussion.
No indication that other side of the question have even been considered.
Just propaganda.

Now look at this site and see the even handed nature of the commentary.
They summarise the views for and against, critically review both sides of the argument, and arrive at conclusions based on the evidence

Vaccine concerns

Here is a summary to make it easier:

SUMMARY:

(A)

Two studies have been cited by those claiming that the MMR vaccine causes autism.
- Both studies are critically flawed.


The first study:

Andrew Wakefield's first study in 1998 attempted to show that the MMR vaccine caused a series of events leading to autism.
(The sequence was: intestinal inflammation -> entrance into the bloodstream of proteins -> harm to the brain ->autism).

In support of his hypothesis, Dr. Wakefield described
- 12 children with developmental delay, 8 of whom had autism.
- the 8 children had intestinal complaints.
- the 8 children developed autism within one month of receiving MMR.

The Wakefield paper written in 1998 was flawed because:
- In 1998 about 90 percent of children in England received MMR vaccine.
- Therefore, most children with autism would have received an MMR vaccine.
- MMR is administered at a time when many children are diagnosed with autism.
- Therefore, many children diagnosed with autism would have received the vaccine recently.
- The intestinal symptoms were observed not before bit after symptoms of autism in all eight cases

The determination of whether MMR causes autism is best made by studying the incidence of autism in both vaccinated and unvaccinated children.
- Wakefield did not do this.


The second study:

Andrew Wakefield's second study in 2001, tested intestinal biopsy samples for the presence of measles virus in children with and without autism.
- Of children with autism, 75 of 91 were found to have measles virus in intestinal biopsy tissue.
- Of children without autism, 5 of 70 patients were found to have measles virus in intestinal biopsy tissue.

This study was critically flawed for the following reasons:
- children with and without autism were not matched for whether or not they had recieved the MMR vaccine.
- children with and without autism were not matched for the length of time between receipt of MMR vaccine and collection of biopsy specimens.
- They did not check to see if the measles virus detected in these samples was natural measles virus or vaccine virus.
- The tests for the presence of the virus in intestinal biopsies have a high of false positive rate.
- The person doing the test knew whether the person from whom the sample was obtained was autistic or not.
(Information about vaccine status and tests to distinguish between natural measles virus or vaccine virus were clearly available to the investigators and critical to their hypothesis but they did not use this information or the test)


(B)

On the other hand, four studies have been performed that disprove the notion that MMR causes autism.

In 1999, Brent Taylor examined the relationship between receipt of MMR and development of autism in a well-controlled study.
- He identified cases by registers from the North Thames region of England before and after the MMR vaccine was introduced into the United Kingdom in 1988.
- He then examined the incidence and age at diagnosis of autism in vaccinated and unvaccinated children.
- He found that the percentage of children vaccinated was the same in children with autism as in children without autusm.
- He found no difference in the age of diagnosis of autism in vaccinated and unvaccinated children.
- He fopund that the onset of symptoms of autism did not occur within two, four, or six months of receiving the MMR vaccine.

Natalie Smith published a study in the Journal of the American Medical Association showing that the increase in the number of children reported to have autism was not associated with an increase in the use of the MMR vaccine.

Hershel Jick published a study in the British Medical Journal also showing that the increase in the number of children reported to have autism was not associated with an increase in the use of the MMR vaccine.

In November 2002, the largest study to examine the relationship between the MMR vaccine and autism was reported in the New England Journal of Medicine.
- About 537,000 children in Denmark who either did or did not receive the MMR vaccine were examined for about six years.
- The incidence of autism was the same in children who did or did not receive the MMR vaccine.
(compared to the 12 in Wakefields first study and 161 in his second study.)

Also:
- studies of the genetics of autism,
- studies of the timing of the first symptoms of autism (home-movie studies).
- studies of the relationship between autism and the receipt of the MMR vaccine.
- studies of the nervous system of children with autism.
- studies of thalidomide and natural rubella infection.
all support the fact that autism occurs during development of the nervous system early in the womb.



Okay, Gina, that's three issues now on which I have commented in some depth or spent a great deal of time reseaching.
Let's discuss these issues first.
(Two are ones you have selected via your links, the other was my selection.)

regards,
BillyJoe

BillyJoe wrote :

< Yes, I have read extensively on vaccines.
The evidence, as I say, is incontrovertible. >

WARNING !

In Malaysia, there has been reports of increased incidence of Tuberculosis inspite of rigid vaccination regulations. WHO recently has reported the same. Is the TB vaccine effective ?

Please enlighten me on the immunological EVIDENCE of this vaccine .

With regards
Lew

Good try Lew! :)

Keep on track now. ;)

We have three open discussions:
1. Safety and effectiveness of the HIB vaccine
2. The issues surrounding thiomersol/murcury
3. Autism and the MMR vaccine

regards,
BillyJoe

(I will look into it though for future reference)

Just a quick reply on TB.
(But I'm not going to be diverted. ;) )

There are problems controlling TB:

- the vaccine is only 70 -80% effective.
- the vaccine cannot be given if the mantoux test is positive.
- the mantoux test is not straightforward requiring a test injection followed by examination of the result after 72 hours
- the treatment is complicated, expensive, and prolonged and requires the use triple-drug regimens. The result that third world countries fail to provide adequate financial and manpower support, medical/nursing personel especially in third world countries often fail to implement it properly, and patients often fail to complete treatment.
- HIV in third world countries is compounding this effect by adversely affecting the immune system of carriers of TB.

Again, it is a big issue, and we must be careful here that we don't end up discusssing everything and learning nothing.

regards,
BillyJoe

BillyJoe wrote:

" We have three open discussions:
1. Safety and effectiveness of the HIB vaccine
2. The issues surrounding thiomersol/murcury
3. Autism and the MMR vaccine "

Why not include the TB vaccine in the discussion ?
or are you trying to dodge the IMMUNOLOGICAL FACTOR ? You have only to request for the reference if you bother to ask.

With regards
Lew

I am not dodging it, but we already have a few topics that I have done a lot of work on that haven't been responded to yet.
I think this should be two way exchange, that's all.

BJ